Mathematics Curriculum Policies and Practices in the U.S.: The Common Core State Standards Initiative

Part of the Advances in Mathematics Education book series (AME)


In the U.S. three curriculum strategies are being used to improve school mathematics programs and student learning outcomes: (a) the movement to common standards; (b) advances in technology-based instructional resources; and (c) the pressure of accountability measured by end-of-year assessments. Together, these strategies are creating a “perfect storm” for significant changes in mathematics curriculum. Elements of the reform strategy are reviewed and discussed. In addition, an argument is made for systematic monitoring of the initiative in order to learn about its impact and inform future policy decisions.


Mathematics Curriculum Standards Textbooks Digital Assessments 


  1. American Association for the Advancement of Science (2000). Middle grades mathematics textbooks: a benchmarks-based evaluation. Washington: Author. Google Scholar
  2. Association of American Publishers (2010). Opportunity to learn in high-stakes testing. An AAP white paper developed by Dr. Susan E. Phillips.
  3. Bandeira de Mello, V., Blankenship, C., & McLaughlin, D. H. (2009). Mapping state proficiency standards onto NAEP scales: 2005–2007 (NCES 2010-456). Washington: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Google Scholar
  4. Chávez, O. (2003). From the textbook to the enacted curriculum: textbook use in the middle school mathematics classroom. University of Missouri-Columbia, Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Google Scholar
  5. Common Core State Standards Initiative (2010). Common core state standards for mathematics. Washington: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and the Council of Chief State School Officers. Google Scholar
  6. Confrey, J., & Maloney, A. (2011). Engineering [for] effectiveness in mathematics education. In Highly successful STEM schools or programs for K-12 STEM education: a workshop. Washington: National Academies Board on Science Education and Board on Testing and Assessment. Google Scholar
  7. Confrey, J. (2007). Tracing the evolution of mathematics content standards in the united states: looking back and projecting forward towards national standards. Paper presented at the Conference on K-12 Mathematics Curriculum Standards. Google Scholar
  8. Goertz, M. E. (2009). Standards-based reform: lessons from the past, directions for the future. In K. Wong & R. Rothman (Eds.), Clio at the table: using history to inform and improve education policy (pp. 201–219). New York: Peter Lang Publishing. Google Scholar
  9. Hirsch, C. R. (2007). Curriculum materials matter. In C. R. Hirsch (Ed.), Perspectives on the design and development of school mathematics curricula (pp. 1–5). Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Google Scholar
  10. Kilpatrick, J. (2003). What works? In S. Senk & D. Thompson (Eds.), Standards-oriented school mathematics curricula: what does research say about student outcomes? (pp. 471–488). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Google Scholar
  11. Kober, N., & Stark, D. (2011). States’ progress and challenges in implementing common core state standards. Washington: Center for Education Policy. Google Scholar
  12. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1980). An agenda for action. Reston: Author. Google Scholar
  13. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston: Author. Google Scholar
  14. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston: Author. Google Scholar
  15. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2006). Curriculum focal points for prekindergarten through grade 8 mathematics. Reston: Author. Google Scholar
  16. Reys, B. J. (Ed.) (2006). The intended mathematics curriculum as represented in state-level curriculum standards: consensus or confusion? Charlotte: Information Age. Google Scholar
  17. Reys, B. J., & Reys, R. E. (2006). The development and publication of elementary mathematics textbooks: let the buyer beware! Phi Delta Kappan, 87(5), 377–383. Google Scholar
  18. Schmidt, W. H. (2012). Common core math standards implementation can lead to improved student achievement [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from
  19. Schmidt, W. H., & Valverde, G. (1997). Policy lessons from TIMSS. Paper prepared for the National Governors Association. Google Scholar
  20. Schoenfeld, A. H. (2002). Making mathematics work for all children: issues of standards, testing, and equity. Educational Researcher, 31(1), 13–25. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Seeley, C. L. (2003). Mathematics textbook adoption in the United States. In G. M. Stanic & J. Kilpatrick (Eds.), A history of school mathematics (pp. 957–988). Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Google Scholar
  22. Senk, S., & Thompson, D. (2003). Standards-based school mathematics curricula: what are they? What do students learn? Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Google Scholar
  23. Trafton, P., Reys, B. J., & Wasman, D. (2002). Standards-based mathematics instructional materials: a phrase in search of a definition. Phi Delta Kappan, 83(3), 259–264. Google Scholar
  24. U. S. Department of Education (2001). The no child left behind act of 2001. Washington: Author. Accessed 21 October 2007. Google Scholar
  25. Weiss, I. R., & Heck, D. (2011). CCSSM priority research agenda. Alhambra: Horizon Research, Inc. Google Scholar
  26. Weiss, I. R., Banilower, E. R., McMahon, K. C., & Smith, P. S. (2001). Report of the 2000 national survey of science and mathematics education. Chapel Hill: Horizon Research, Inc. Retrieved February 28, 2003 from Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for the Study of Mathematics CurriculumUniversity of MissouriColumbiaUSA

Personalised recommendations